Trial reportSurgery today2026
Comparison of synchronous and nonsynchronous imitation in robotic surgical training: a pilot randomized-controlled trial.
Trial report in Surgery today, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeVideo-based learning, a form of nonsynchronous imitation, is widely used in robotic surgical training. However, the effectiveness of synchronous imitation, in which trainees replicate expert movements in real time, remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of synchronous imitation on robotic surgical skill acquisition.
methodsA randomized-controlled trial was conducted with 20 novices in robotic surgery, between April 2023 and March 2024. Participants were stratified by suturing experience and randomly assigned to either the synchronous or nonsynchronous group. The training task was "Thread the Rings" on the da Vinci Skills Simulator. Before each of the 10 trials, participants in the synchronous group watched a recorded expert demonstration and attempted to mimic instrument movements in real time. In contrast, the nonsynchronous group viewed the same video passively without simultaneous imitation. Proficiency scores (0-100) were calculated automatically for each trial.
resultsBoth groups demonstrated improvement over time; however, mixed-effects regression models showed no significant difference in the rate of score improvement between the two groups (P = 0.88).
conclusionsSynchronous imitation did not lead to superior skill acquisition compared with video-based observations alone. Further research with a larger sample size is warranted to validate these findings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41204959What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.